Alissa Golob

‘Shawinigan handshake’, Jean Chretien and Abortion

Alissa Golob

This morning former Prime Minister Jean Chretien wrote in a fundraising letter for the Liberal party, “Unless we are bold. Unless we seize the moment. Everything we built will start being chipped away. The Conservatives have already ended gun control and Kyoto… next may be a woman’s right to choose… one by one, the values we cherish as Canadians will be gone.”

Question, Mr. Former Prime Minister: since when is allowing a woman the choice to have an abortionist kill her preborn baby considered a “value”. I know you’ve been out of politics for a while, and may or may not understand English fully - but dead babies do not equal “Canadian values”.

Oh, and guess what? The majority of Canadians agree.

In a poll conducted back in May by Abacus Data, results showed that the majority of Canadians believe there should be restrictions on abortion. If abortion is such a value, why are the majority of Canadians saying they want it restricted?

To liken abortion to a “value” is more terrifying than the choke-hold you put Bill Clennett in back in ’96.

Apparently Mr. Chretien, you also forgot that in April, Prime Minister Harper blatantly said: “As long as I’m prime minister, we are not reopening the abortion debate…the government will not bring forward any such legislation, and any such legislation that is brought forward will be defeated.”

So breath. Relax. Have a smoothie. You don’t have to attack our Prime Minister with false allegations like trying to end abortion. He’s not the one you have to worry about; it’s the majority of Canadians who refuse to be silenced on the issue. It’s the ever-growing number of young people who demand, and will continue to demand that ALL human rights are protected in law and cared for in life.

The Canada which you once tainted during your pro-abortion reign is being disintegrated; not by Harper, but by those who know the true meaning of the word “value”; by those who have the sense to know that to uphold the most fundamental human right - the right to life - is the most important “value” a country can have.

My advice: Stop the scare-tactic fundraising and public embarrassment. Instead - fork over some cash from your six-figure-tax-payer-funded-pension to promote your liberal propaganda. Just a suggestion…

Alissa Golob is the Youth Coordinator for Campaign Life Coalition.  This piece is republished with permission from the CLC Youth Blog.

Support hard-hitting pro-life and pro-family journalism.

Donate to LifeSite's fall campaign today


Share this article

Advertisement

Ontario cuts funding for cataract surgery, but pays $51 million a year for abortion

Alissa Golob
By Alissa Golob

Sorry to say, I’m no friend of the NDP. Despite a furtive fascination with Tom Mulcair’s beard, his party’s no choice requirement that all members must be pro-“choice” sets us at irreconcilable odds.  And yet, I have to admit to a near orange crush as the Ontario NDPs continue their charge against the Liberal “I Wynne, you lose” spending of taxpayer money.

Last week, rookie MPP NDP Peggy Sattler performed a parliamentary smack down on Health Minister Deb Matthews when challenging her during question period on a recent decision to slash money for cataract surgery.  This, despite the fact that the need for such vital surgery is increasing across the province.  As Windsor native Del Oxford noted, following the cancellation of cataract surgery for his wife, Rose, “It’s like a car insurance company saying we’ve had too many accidents this year, we’re cutting everyone off”.  

Everyone indeed.  From the middle-aged Rose Oxford to the two year-old Liam Reid, who has been persistently denied funding by OHIP for treatment of a congenital eye disease that could leave him blind, the Liberals have a big tent approach to the refusal of critical health services.  Not that I don’t get it, mind you.  Irresponsible spending needs to be recouped from somewhere, and a scorched earth approach to health care policy will assist in beating a retreat from our provincial government’s glorious energy vision.  So by all means, continue delisting medically necessary procedures like autism funding, cataract surgery, various cancer treatments, dental and eye care, physiotherapy, and other non-gas plant related matters.

And, to be fair, there’s strategic sense in denying eye care when seeking to have constituents lose sight of the anti-democratic shenanigans of the party-in-charge.  Just last May, the province quietly passed a bill that disallows the collection of data on abortion through Freedom of Information requests.  Dr. Margaret Somerville, director of McGill University’s Centre for Medicine, denounced this stealth approach to denying empirical data. saying, “the government … just want[s] the issue of abortion to go away and hope[s] that secrecy of information will help to achieve that outcome.”

Instead of unhinged spending and political attacks on our freedoms, the Liberals could try another approach.

In addition to the delisting of medical procedures noted above, Ontario hospitals have drastically downsized: surgical wings have been closed and hospital layoffs have been in the hundreds.  And yet, no matter how old she is, no matter what stage of pregnancy she’s at, a woman can have as many abortions as she wants at any hospital or abortion clinic in Ontario.  This is all on the taxpayer’s tab, while those same taxpayers are denied any recourse to knowing how much is being spent on these elective procedures.

How much do abortions cost Ontarians?  The last accurate available data was done by Project for an Ontario Women’s Health Evidence-Based Report (POWER), which,using OHIP billing records and several databases, concluded that 51,000 abortions were performed in 2007 in Ontario alone.  Given that an abortion procedure costs on average around $1,000, taxpayers currently spend approximately $51 million annually to cover this medically unnecessary procedure.

If the eyebrows raised at reading “unnecessary”, consider that the go-to scenarios of rape and incest for pro-abortion advocates constitute less than 1% of abortions.  As reported by the Guttmacher institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in North America) over 96% of abortions are performed as a back-up form of birth control.  Joyce Arthur, Canada’s leading pro-choice activist, insists in her latest Rabble article, that “abortion must be there as a safety net”.

So why don’t Wynne and company stop hiding provincial spending and other data on abortion, and save some money?  De-funding abortion will serve all those ends, and maybe leave a little money to dedicate to the medically necessary procedures required by Liam Reid and Rose Oxford.

Such a strategy would demonstrate a consistency that could educate our Prime Minister.  Despite his refusal to “re-open the abortion debate,” repeated with all the charm of a broken record, our leader said during the 2011 debate over Rae’s Reproductive Motion that “Canadians want to see their foreign aid money used for things that will help save the lives of women and children in ways that unite the Canadian people rather than divide them”.  Well, as it should be internationally, so it should be domestically.

Abortion in Ontario must be de-funded.  No, it will not solve our debt problems, governmental profligacy, or the diminishment of our health system, but it will be one significant measure to assist with those challenges while reorienting spending toward medical necessities.  Given that defunding abortion is more popular than any political party in Ontario at the moment, this proposal needs serious consideration 

And, though I think it could be argued that it is a medical necessity, I’ll stand by the principles articulated here and will not seek public funding for treatment of my fascination with Mulcair’s beard.

Share this article

Advertisement

Facebook acknowledges abortion is ‘sadistic violence against people’

Alissa Golob
By Alissa Golob
Image

I have a routine as most people do. I wake up, triple yawn my way to the kitchen, make my morning shake, eat half a piece of toast, shower, beautify, and walk to work. At work I turn on my computer, plug in my iPhone, check my voicemail/e-mail and prepare myself for the day’s following duties. Sometimes, I will admit, my routine is slightly “thrown off”. For example, I could be partnering with Mary Wagner and sidewalk counseling until she gets dragged off by police for aiding women in the waiting room of abortuaries, debating random strangers on the sidewalk after they verbally abuse people praying outside of death clinics, doing high school presentations, meeting with MPs/ MPPs etc.

The day in the life of a professional abortion abolitionist is never boring; however, for those of you who think our lives are always dramatic, we do in fact have regular days in the office just like everybody else. But my day was thrown off from the start.

As I was checking my e-mail I noticed I could not log into my Facebook account without answering numerous security questions, which I found strange, but none the less, I played along. After I answered the last question, this showed up on my screen:

Facebook notified me that they removed this photo taken last weekend during a “choice” chain demonstration CLC Youth put on, because the content “violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities”. It then directed me to Facebook’s “Community Standards”, where I could review the rules. To my surprise, I actually agreed with what they had to say. Under “graphic content”, they wrote, (and I quote), “while we are a platform for sharing events that take place in your life and around the world, any inappropriately graphic content will be removed when found on the site. Sadistic displays of violence against people or animals, or depictions of sexual assault, are prohibited.”

Although some may be offended that Facebook is discriminating against pro-lifers based on the content of the images (skinned geese anyone?), what Facebook is indirectly saying is that graphic images of abortion depict “sadistic violence against people”.

So… my question is, if Facebook can acknowledge that abortion is extreme cruelty against people, why can’t those who label themselves pro-”choice”?

To view this original post, along with more like it, please visit Campaign Life Coalition Youth’s blog.

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook